— Action Alert from Mothers for Peace on SB 968

Update June 6: SB 968 passed the California Senate on June 1. It is now in the state Assembly and has has a first reading. Information on bill history : http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB968

SB968 would require Pacific Gas and Electric Company to submit an assessment of the economic impact for the regions surrounding Diablo Canyon that could occur if the Diablo Canyon power plant Units 1 and 2 were to temporarily or permanently shut down.

In light of the recent heavy push by The Breakthrough Institute, unions, and others to keep the plant open until 2044-2045, we feel that this bill will unintentionally become an organizing tool and “hit piece” for those asking for re-licensing. Please write, phone, fax or email your state senator – tell them: VOTE NO!

 The bill is still unbalanced: The inclusion of the words “beneficial” and “net economic effects” does begin the process of balancing the bill but that is where that “balance” ends. The language of the bill itself still focuses on adverse economic effects.

 “Mitigation” is not clearly defined: The terms “mitigate” and “mitigation” must be clearly defined or examples of the types of mitigation be described “Mitigation would include exploring the creation of jobs for which some employees at Diablo might be qualified or for which they could be offered training. Mitigation would also include the assessment of alternative renewable forms of energy that might be added at the Diablo Canyon site or at other locations in San Luis Obispo County or nearby regions.”

 There is no call to also study a successful closure: SONGS was shut down unexpectedly thereby creating a lot of problems that would not have been present in a planned closure. For a truly balanced study one must also look at another NPP that was “successfully” shut down. In the State of California, that NPP would be Rancho Seco in Sacramento. All of the waste is being stored on-site in dry-cask storage and the land around the closed plant is now a solar farm. There are many lessons to be learned from Rancho Seco and a study of that closure must be included.

 The bill is incomplete; it does not direct a study of what happens in case of an accident: There are two ways Diablo Canyon will shut down.

A planned closure:

In 2024-2025 if relicensing does not occur and the plant closes when the current licenses expire

 In 2044-2045 if relicensing does occur.

An unplanned closure:

 The State Lands Commission denies Diablo Canyon land use permits and the plant must close.

 The CA State Water Board rules that Diablo Canyon is no longer exempt from the Clean Air Act and can no longer use Once Through Cooling. The cost of building cooling towers could cause PG&E to close Diablo like SCGE did at San Onofre because of the generators.

 There is a larger than design basis earthquake that causes a radioactive release, spent-fuel pool fire or, worst case scenario, causes a melt-down in the containment.

Why would one look only at one scenario of early closure and not also look at the cost that an accident would cause? If the County of San Luis Obispo and surrounding regions are to be able to use the information that this study would provide, they need ALL of the information not just some of it.